Bug 677875

Summary: Provide pear-zfcampus
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Renich Bon Ciric <renich>
Component: php-ZendFrameworkAssignee: Felix Kaechele <felix>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 19CC: fedora, fedora, felix
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-08-17 10:46:05 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Renich Bon Ciric 2011-02-16 07:41:44 UTC
You're, currently, maintaining this package and I've seen some omissions because of some missing functionality in Fedora (mainly oracle and some pdo extensions?):

I am reading the ZF Manual and saw that there is a pear channel; installable with instructions here:

http://zendframework.com/manual/en/zend.tool.usage.cli.html

Isn't it easier to provide this channel and forget about maintaining the package? (and it's missing functionality) with, maybe, a README.Fedora saying that some packages don't work out of the box because of missing extensions/functionality?

Is RPMFusion an option for maintaining these extensions?

Comment 1 Felix Kaechele 2011-02-20 10:46:42 UTC
The thing here is: Installing ZendFramework through PEAR still leaves you with the parts not working that are lacking dependencies.
The dependencies that are missing are missing in Fedora's php, so actually installing it through PEAR doesn't give you the missing dependencies either.

About maintaining it in RPMFusion: I'm not aware that you can build only part of the PHP stack and ship it as module. As I understand it, it must be built in one go. Thus we'd need to maintain a whole PHP stack in RPMFusion, which I think is a bad idea.

The idea of having a ZendFramework package in Fedora is so that other packages can depend on it.

Comment 2 Renich Bon Ciric 2011-02-20 20:21:13 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> The thing here is: Installing ZendFramework through PEAR still leaves you with
> the parts not working that are lacking dependencies.
> The dependencies that are missing are missing in Fedora's php, so actually
> installing it through PEAR doesn't give you the missing dependencies either.

Understood. 

Well, about Zend's pear package, I know it doesn't care for dependencies and that's the reason to package ZendFramework.

> About maintaining it in RPMFusion: I'm not aware that you can build only part
> of the PHP stack and ship it as module. As I understand it, it must be built in
> one go. Thus we'd need to maintain a whole PHP stack in RPMFusion, which I
> think is a bad idea.
> 
> The idea of having a ZendFramework package in Fedora is so that other packages
> can depend on it.

On the other hand, providing what can be provided as separate rpm modules, should be done; either on the main repo or in RPMFusion.org.

I have to check the spec file in order to see what can and can't be done.

php_oci8, IMHO, could be maintained as a module; for example:
http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/3/srodzaj/2/search/php-5.3.6-0.1.RC1.fc14.remi.src.rpm

As I said, I need to check the spec to see what's missing and could be provided...

Comment 3 Remi Collet 2012-01-07 07:02:43 UTC
> I'm not aware that you can build only part
> of the PHP stack and ship it as module.
You can, see php-extras which is available in EPEL.

For oci8, you can build it from PHP sources or from PECL extension sources.
But in all cases, this could not be part of fedora or RPM Fusion as this requires Oracle Client which could not be redistributed.

Only solution is to use a third party repository which provides php-oci8 and php-ZendFramework-Db-Adapter-Oracle (such as mine).

I have try to contact Oracle to see if we could redistribute instant client in RPM Fusion (non-free), but still have no response from them.

Comment 4 Fedora Admin XMLRPC Client 2012-01-12 16:40:40 UTC
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database.  Reassigning to the new owner of this component.

Comment 5 Felix Kaechele 2013-02-13 22:53:57 UTC
Is this still an issue?

Comment 6 Fedora End Of Life 2013-04-03 19:21:37 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle.
Changing version to '19'.

(As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development
cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.)

More information and reason for this action is here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19